- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The plaintiff whose decree of possession by redemption of mortgage has been reversed by the High Court in Second Appeal has approached this Court by means of the present appeal.
(3.) The relief sought in the suit was sought to be resisted by the defendant (respondent herein) by contending that he was not the mortgagee but the tenant of the original landlord. To prove the aforesaid point, the defendant sought leave of the learned trial Court to adduce additional evidence by way of new/additional documents which was rejected by order dated 4th March, 2006 on the ground that the defendant had taken more than a year to adduce his evidence in the case. The said order was confirmed by the High Court in the civil revision proceeding by order dated 17th March, 2006, which is extracted below: "The defendant has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 4.3.2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Sunam, whereby his application for leading additional evidence has been dismissed. After arguing for some time, counsel for the petitioner states that he does not want to press this petition. Dismissed as not pressed.";